↓ Skip to main content

Muscarinic M1 receptors modulate endotoxemia-induced loss of synaptic plasticity

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neuropathologica Communications, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Muscarinic M1 receptors modulate endotoxemia-induced loss of synaptic plasticity
Published in
Acta Neuropathologica Communications, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40478-015-0245-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aleksandar R. Zivkovic, Oliver Sedlaczek, Rebecca von Haken, Karsten Schmidt, Thorsten Brenner, Markus A. Weigand, Hilmar Bading, C. Peter Bengtson, Stefan Hofer

Abstract

Septic encephalopathy is associated with rapid deterioration of cortical functions. Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) we detected functional abnormalities in the hippocampal formation of patients with septic delirium. Hippocampal dysfunction was further investigated in an animal model for sepsis using lipopolysaccharide (LPS) injections to induce endotoxemia in rats, followed by electrophysiological recordings in brain slices. Endotoxemia induced a deficit in long term potentiation which was completely reversed by apamin, a blocker of small conductance calcium-activated potassium (SK) channels, and partly restored by treatment with physostigmine (eserine), an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, or TBPB, a selective M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor agonist. These results suggest a novel role for SK channels in the etiology of endotoxemia and explain why boosting cholinergic function restores deficits in synaptic plasticity. Drugs which enhance cholinergic or M1 activity in the brain may prove beneficial in treatment of septic delirium in the intensive care unit.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 20%
Other 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 41%
Neuroscience 8 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2015.
All research outputs
#7,836,460
of 12,489,036 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#400
of 574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,320
of 341,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#67
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,489,036 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,418 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.